Forensics - psychological explanations: cognitive Flashcards
What are Kohlberg’s levels of moral reasoning
Level 1: pre-conventional morality
Level 2: conventional morality
Level 3: post-conventional morality
How does criminal behaviour link to levels of moral reasoning?
Criminals = less moral reasoning than non-criminals
Level 1: pre-conventional morality
Stags 1: punishment orientation - rules obeyed to avoid punishment
Stage 2: instrumental orientation - rules obeyed for personal gain
Level 2: conventional morality
Stage 3: ‘good boy’/‘good girl’ orientation - rules obeyed for approval
Stage 4: maintenance of social order
Level 3: post-conventional morality
Stage 5: morality of contract and individual rights - rules challenged if infringe on rights of others
Stage 6: morality of conscience - individuals have personal set of principles
Where are criminals more likely to be classified in levels of moral reasoning
Pre-conventional stages - level 1
Why will adults at level 1 commit crimes
If there is a reward (money, respect) and they believe they are likely to get away with it
2 cognitive distortions that contribute to criminal behaviour
- Hostile attribution bias
- Minimalisation
What is hostile attribution bias
Offenders misread non-aggressive cues that trigger a disproportionate response. Roots may be apparent in childhood
Schonenberg and Justyte’s evidence supporting hostile attribution bias
55 violent offenders shown pics of unambiguous facial expressions. More likely to perceive as hostile/angry. Evident in children too (Dodge and Frame)
Minimalisation
Attempt to downplay or deny the seriousness of their offence
Barbaree’s evidence supporting Minimalisation
Found among 26 rapists, 54% denied committing offence and 40% minimised harm they caused the victim
Evaluation of level of moral reasoning
+ Palmer and Hollin compare moral dilemma related questions (e.g. not taking things that belong to others) in criminals and non-criminals. Offender group = less mature moral reasoning. Consistent with Kohlberg’s predictions
- Thornton and Reid = people committing crimes for financial gain more likely to be lower levels than impulsive crimes. Theory doesn’t apply to all forms of crime?
Evaluation of cognitive distortions
+ application of CBT. Offenders encouraged to ‘face up’ to what they have done. Less denial and minimilisation correlated with less chance of reoffending
- depends on type of offence. Non-contact sex offenders = more cognitive distortions than contact sex offenders, distortions are not present in same way in all offenders
